Replacement FT for buzzer sounding?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Uh, logic, common sense, and fair play? If I'm overlooking something, let's hear it.

If a home scorer hits a timer as a visiting player is shooting a free throw, there's no question I'm going to allow another throw. I'm not entirely certain I'd give the same latitude to a home player -- depends on the situation.

Same as if the timer is a bit slow stopping the clock -- I'm likely going to look at it a bit more carefully if the home timer does something marginal that disadvantages the visiting team.

They're supposed to be part of the officiating crew, but in most cases they are hired by the home team and in their hearts are not a neutral party.

[SAJ]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is a judgement call if you feel the FTs were affected by the buzzer. Otherwise you play on. Hard to tell if that is the case here. I guess the question I would ask, which was the home team? If the home team was at the line I would be more inclined to let it go. If the visiting team did this I would be more likely to give a substitute. It also would matter about the timing of the buzzer as well. But ultimately the casebook used to say it was at the discretion of the officials to decide if you stop play for this.

Peace

White=home

imo

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

If a home scorer hits a timer as a visiting player is shooting a free throw, there's no question I'm going to allow another throw. I'm not entirely certain I'd give the same latitude to a home player -- depends on the situation.

Same as if the timer is a bit slow stopping the clock -- I'm likely going to look at it a bit more carefully if the home timer does something marginal that disadvantages the visiting team.

They're supposed to be part of the officiating crew, but in most cases they are hired by the home team and in their hearts are not a neutral party.

So you make an officiating decision based on what may be "in the heart" of the clock operator?

[Adam]

Yes, I'd be more inclined to give a replacement shot to the visiting team. Right or wrong, I just would.

[just another ref]

Here's the problem I have.

Your extra consideration definitely favors one team.

You know that when you do it.

This is, in theory to rectify a disservice which was intentionally done by someone else, but you will never know whether it was intentional or not.



When your partner makes 3 calls in a row against one team which all look horrible to you, are you inclined to ignore a call against the other team?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SAJ

White=home

imo

Could have been a tournament. Not always the indication of who is actually home. And if it was a tournament, then the conversation from my end would be different.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the problem I have.

Your extra consideration definitely favors one team.

You know that when you do it.

This is, in theory to rectify a disservice which was intentionally done by someone else, but you will never know whether it was intentional or not.



When your partner makes 3 calls in a row against one team which all look horrible to you, are you inclined to ignore a call against the other team?

With all due respect I do not know what the last example has to do with this issue. We know if a game is a regular game the home team likely hired the home team and in most of our experiences, they have a rooting interest in their team. They are often parents, teachers or people directly involved with the program. It is entirely possible for them to do something that benefits their team. Not to say this was the case, but it would cross my mind. And that has nothing to do with what my partners call. But all of a sudden in a critical stage of the game the horn goes off, then I am thinking of what could be happening. As I said it really depends on the timing of the horn. If the horn goes off right as the FT is being shot, I will take a different approach than if the horn goes off right when the ball is at the disposal of the shooter. It is not black and white, it is very grey and why I would think about all those things and come to a decision. I might stop everything before a shot is taken if it is done at the right time.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

With all due respect I do not know what the last example has to do with this issue.

The issue is giving special consideration to one team to fix something which is possibly unjust. If your partner calls several fouls on the visitors when it is obvious to you that there is no contact on any of them, that would be unjust, but you wouldn't look at the next play any differently with this in mind, would you? I hope not.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But if the home team did it to themselves, then that is all you have to say to the coach. "You hired them."

We've been focusing only on the other side of the issue, but this is just as bad. You think it's all right to penalize a home player who was distracted on a free throw because the home clock operator is incompetent?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The issue is giving special consideration to one team to fix something which is possibly unjust. If your partner calls several fouls on the visitors when it is obvious to you that there is no contact on any of them, that would be unjust, but you wouldn't look at the next play any differently with this in mind, would you? I hope not.

Again, not sure what my partner's calls have to do with what a table does to disrupt the visiting team? And if my partner is screwing things up like that, they will not be there very long and I do not have to do much of anything.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

We've been focusing only on the other side of the issue, but this is just as bad. You think it's all right to penalize a home player who was distracted on a free throw because the home clock operator is incompetent?

This is not about morals. This is about game management. The home team screws their team they are not getting the benefit of the doubt.

I am not asking you to like it, just telling you what I will and have done. I am OK with my position on this and having experienced these situation personally that is how I handled them. And in my experience this is the way most officials I deal with handle it the same way.

Peace

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If the home team was at the line I would be more inclined to let it go.

A few yrs ago in a VG game I had the home team "accidentally" touch the wrong button at the table just before half-time and the announcements/advertisements started playing just as the player was releasing the shot. CLANK..... it was the home team. Play on.

As this play states, it did make me pause though......

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is not about morals. This is about game management. The home team screws their team they are not getting the benefit of the doubt.

I am not asking you to like it, just telling you what I will and have done. I am OK with my position on this and having experienced these situation personally that is how I handled them. And in my experience this is the way most officials I deal with handle it the same way.

Peace

What he said. JAR, your even up scenario has nothing to do with this, either.

[Adam]

It's not just the intentional stuff, either. Even if it's just incompetence....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Here's the problem I have.

Your extra consideration definitely favors one team.

You know that when you do it.

This is, in theory to rectify a disservice which was intentionally done by someone else, but you will never know whether it was intentional or not.



When your partner makes 3 calls in a row against one team which all look horrible to you, are you inclined to ignore a call against the other team?

Wow, talk about a non sequitur.